The public discourse suddenly swirls angrily around this issue: How big a gun should people be allowed to own, with how many bullets? Despite all the furor, the question has a very simple answer. But it's the wrong question.

Even those who routinely carry a concealed weapon, and certainly many who don't, wrestle with the question, "How much firepower does anyone need?" Perhaps those who don't own weapons think the answer should be very close to zero. Those who know that many times each year violent attacks are stopped when someone simply shows a weapon understand that self-defense tools are legitimate and necessary, but still worry about where the line should be above that level.

Legislators are hurriedly drafting a variety of bills to answer the question, phrasing them in terms of how evil a weapon looks, whether it automatically chambers the next shell for you, and how many cartridges it can feed. For those more knowledgeable about guns, the real concern is with things far beyond the personal defense category: rocket-propelled grenades, for example, the sort of things jihadists bring to a party at the U.S. embassy.

Here are some simple, foundational ideas to help sort it out.

The first principle is that the federal government has no constitutional say whatsoever in the size or quantity of weapons maintained by the people -- because that very government is the most dangerous person in the room. The Second Amendment has one purpose: to ensure that "we the people" can withstand a tyrannical government, for perhaps the first time in history. The writings of James Madison (Federalist #46), among others, make that abundantly clear...

Something interesting that I got curious about skimmed once is how letters of Marque and Reprisal didn’t authorize scopes of firepower.

Congress just assumed private citizens knew where a private citizen could buy canon. No permission was needed to buy it, arm it or fire it. You only needed Congresses permission to fire it at a foreigner.

12
posted on 01/17/2013 8:44:37 PM PST
by Psycho_Bunny
(Thought Puzzle: Describe Islam without using the phrase "mental disorder" more than four times.)

I constantly hear on the MSM that no one “needs” a simautomatic weapon. Nothing in the 2A says that I must “need”, just says I have the right to own. Wheather I need a certain gun has nothing to do with my right to own a certain gun.

“Big enough” is whatever is appropriate to protect my land and my family. The range of predators and varmints goes from rabbits to #400 hogs. Sometimes I must work while armed because of coyotes and bears. The needs vary, so the weapons vary. None of it is the government’s business.

21
posted on 01/17/2013 8:56:38 PM PST
by Carry_Okie
(GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")

Forget 500 HP. My 2011 Sonata has a speedometer with a160 mph top. Don’t know if it will do 160, but it’s done 130 with some pedal still left. Any 19 year old male has access to cars that go past 120. What’s more dangerous, some 40 year old good citizen with a mini 14 and AR locked in his gun closet or a 19 year old male on a Sat nite behind the wheel of a Hyundai Veloster with a 1.6 turbo?

The solution to this one is simple. There has to be SOME limit i.e. you and I should not have nuclear weapons or weaponized anthrax. The test should be this:

If the mere fact of Al Quaeda HAVING something is sufficient to move the Pentagon to action, then you or I should not have it. For example, Al Quaeda just having nuclear weapons or anthrax or shoulder-fired AA weapons will move Uncle Sam to act. On the other hand, AQ could have as many machineguns, as many silenced weapons, as many switchblade knives or street-sweepers as it wants and Uncle Sam wouldn't really give a rat's ass. Why should he give a rat's ass over one of us owning any such? Are we less trustworthy than AQ??

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.